Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring: Difference between revisions

Welcome to the edit warring noticeboard
This page is for reporting active edit warriors and recent violations of restrictions like the three-revert rule. See this guide for instructions on creating diffs for this report. If you see that a user may be about to violate the three-revert rule, consider warning them by placing {{subst:uw-3rr}} on their user talk page. You must notify any user you have reported. You may use {{subst:An3-notice}} ~~~~ to do so. You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format. Additional notes When reporting a user here, your own behavior will also be scrutinized. Be sure you understand WP:REVERT and the definitions below first. The format and contents of a 3RR/1RR report are important, use the "Click here to create a new report" button below to have a report template with the necessary fields to work from. Possible alternatives to filing here are dispute resolution, or a request for page protection. Violations of other restrictions, like WP:1RR violations, may also be brought here. Your report should include two reverts that occurred within a 24-hour period, and a link to where the 1RR restriction was imposed. Definition of edit warring Edit warring is a behavior, typically exemplified by the use of repeated edits to "win" a content dispute. It is different from a bold, revert, discuss (BRD) cycle. Reverting vandalism and banned users is not edit warring; at the same time, content disputes, even egregious point of view edits and other good-faith changes do not constitute vandalism. Administrators often must make a judgment call to identify edit warring when cooling disputes. Administrators currently use several measures to determine if a user is edit warring. Definition of the three-revert rule (3RR) An editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Violations of this rule normally attract blocks of at least 24 hours. Any appearance of gaming the system by reverting a fourth time just outside the 24-hour slot is likely to be treated as a 3RR violation. See here for exemptions. Sections older than 48 hours are archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.
Click here to create a new report

User:Miller110 reported by User:TrangaBellam (Result: Sock blocked)

Page: Sengupta (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Miller110 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 20:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1064907962 by TrangaBellam (talk) dont do edit war.you are removing well source contents."
2. 20:12, 10 January 2022 (UTC) "the line is well sourced and it is from census report by goverment of wesbengal.I am following every rules which ekdalian taught me.check the kayatsha surname articles like ghose,bose,guha,mitra etc where the component elements (varnas) are clearly mentioned"
3. 17:54, 10 January 2022 (UTC) "dont revert my edits.i dont need permission to edit on wikipedia.I have provided the source,if you cant find it then ask me first before revert my edit."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 19:56, 10 January 2022 (UTC) "Adding General Sanctions Notice (sasg) (TW)"
2. 20:00, 10 January 2022 (UTC) "/* Important Notice */ Reply"
3. 20:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on Sengupta."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Thread 1 and an aborted attempt

Comments:

Complete cluelessness: see the parallel edit-warring at Sena dynasty (stayed at 2RR) and misrepresentation of sources before finally giving up. TrangaBellam (talk) 20:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

• Sock indefinitely blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:49, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

  Can you take a look at Satnam2408, an SPA devoted to proving that Baidyas were a higher caste? Returned after a long hiatus to restore Miller110's edits. [See the intersections in editing: meat puppetry.] TrangaBellam (talk) 04:52, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

User: 110.137.195.235 reported by User:The Bangsawan (Result: Blocked)

Page: Kota Kinabalu International Airport (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported:110.137.195.235 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:[1]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [2]
2. [3]
3. [4]
4. [5]
5. [6]
6. [7]
7. [8]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [9]

Comments:
There is a severe edit warring from a non-registered user in the Kota Kinabalu International Airport page. Parts of the page was being blanketed by the user without providing any justification. Several users have tried to resolve the matter and even highlighted the issue on the non-registered user page. However both of the notice were ignored by this user. The record on the removal can be seen on the history tab of Kota Kinabalu International Airport-د بڠساون (talk) 06:08, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Blocked – 12 hours for vandalism by User:TheresNoTime. EdJohnston (talk) 16:55, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

User:61.247.41.175 reported by User:The Bangsawan (Result: Semi)

Page: Kota Kinabalu International Airport (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported:61.247.41.175 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:[10]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [11]
2. [12]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [13]

Comments:
Based on the timeline (as both non-registered ip addressed flip-flop their accounts on the blanking the page of Kota Kinabalu International Airport almost simultaneously, and as-per ip address lookout between the two address location located in the same area, we can deduce that the latter account is a sockpuppet of the former.--د بڠساون (talk) 06:54, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

• Result: Page semiprotected one week by User:RegentsPark. EdJohnston (talk) 16:59, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Someone97816 reported by User:Etzedek24 (Result: )

Page: Murder of Mohammad Anwar (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Someone97816 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 00:41, 12 January 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1065133663 by Etzedek24 (talk) Sure take it to whatever you like. I stand by my discussion. From what I see you just use the excuse of "unreliable sources", "disruptive editing." or "advance a minority viewpoint" to fit your narrative. I am more than happy for more people to review it. So go ahead"
2. 00:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1065130296 by Etzedek24 (talk) And I checked WP:RSPSOURCES couple time and the two sources I cited here are not on the list. Also, I know twitter generally is not reliable source but can be used in certain situation, which is exactly what I did here. You can check WP:SELFSOURCE for more information. If u still disagree with me. I am happy to take it to Noticeboards"
3. 23:42, 11 January 2022 (UTC) "Changed the Daily Kos ref as some editors think is unreliable."

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 00:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC) "Caution: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on Murder of Mohammad Anwar."
2. 00:38, 12 January 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Addition of unsourced or improperly cited material on Murder of Mohammad Anwar."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

Comments:

User is adding summative references from unreliable news sites in addition to a Tweet in order to advance a POV reading of an article where discretionary sanctions might well apply. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 00:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

I tried to explain to user Etzedek24 my counter arguments and posted it to his talk page, which he reverted it for some reasons using the reason of "spam". From what I see, the definition of "unreliable sources" for user Etzedek24 are just based on his taste. He basically suggested all the content he dont like is "minority viewpoint" and should not be included. It sounds more like censorship and whitewashing. I checked WP:RSPSOURCES couple time and the two sources I cited here are not on the list. Also, I know twitter generally is not reliable source but can be used in certain situation, which is exactly what I did here.(WP:SELFSOURCE) I dont think my tone is biased and I even tried to provide conter-argument but it was eventually removed(See the verson of 02:04, 11 January 2022‎) I am always more than happy to discuss it in civil manner with him but that became impossible as he keep threaten to ban me (see my talk page)and basically ignored everything I said in his talk page (He reverted all of it). All he did is leaving angry messages on my talk page. I also suggest to take it to noticeboard for more people to review it couple times but he keep using his agressive attitude toward me.Someone97816 (talk) 00:56, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

• I've reverted Someone's last edit. My view is that if they revert again, they should be blocked for violating 3RR (they haven't done so yet). Obviously, I will not make that decision as I now consider myself WP:INVOLVED.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
  • I wont edit the page until the case is solved. If user Etzedek24 can talk with me in civil manner instead of being condescending and threatening, it probably would be solve much earlier Someone97816 (talk) 01:09, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
    • There's not really a discussion to be had. The sources you are attempting to add, and thus the prose, are from news websites that I cannot imagine any experienced editor would consider reliable and are clearly pushing a certain point of view. So, not only do they fail WP:RS, but also WP:NPOV. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 01:13, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
      • I would not touch the WP:RS issues for now as I think it's best for other people to review it at this point. But as everyone can see in his comment here, he never have any intention to discuss it with me. He never make it clear why he think the sources I cited are not reliable nor reply to my questions (He deleted all the messages I left on his talk page because he think those are "spam"). He believed he is an "experienced editor" so he can decide what is allowed and what is not. I also want to make one thing clear here about WP:NPOV. In the earlier verson (See the verson of 02:04, 11 January 2022‎), I tried to provide arguments from both sides. It only been removed because the first revert. My intention from the start is never about pushing agenda from one side. And it saying a lot about this community since you admit u already make up your mind right from the very start and dont even wanna have a discussion with me all these times.Someone97816 (talk) 01:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
        • Someone, your addition to the article was about as balanced as a seesaw with a pebble on one end and a boulder on the other.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:30, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
          • If this is the issus here, I am more than happy to find more sources to balance both sides. But user Etzedek24 never really point out this concern (as he never wanna have a discussion with me)and just keeping saying I am pusing POV, threaten to ban me and revert everything. Kind of hard to know what really the problem is when the other guy just being extremely agressive toward you and refuse to listen everything u said Someone97816 (talk) 01:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Aydin.mirz reported by User:Curb Safe Charmer (Result: Blocked)

Page: Digital transformation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Aydin.mirz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [14]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [15]
2. [16]
3. [17]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [18]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Their rationale for their revert is that they want their version of the page left up 'to get a grade'.

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [19]

Comments:

• Blocked as WP:NOTHERE.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Buffalo8 reported by User:Firefangledfeathers (Result: Partially Blocked 1 week)

Page: Intelligence quotient (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: Buffalo8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 18:36, 12 January 2022 (UTC) "/* Sex */ Added clarification"
2. 18:33, 12 January 2022 (UTC) ""
3. 17:15, 12 January 2022 (UTC) ""
4. More similar edits dating back to last October

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

• Warning #1
• Warning #2

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: User:Generalrelative opened [Talk:Intelligence_quotient#Buffalo8's_addition|a talk page section]] to discuss Buffalo8's edits, and pinged them. They have not engaged in any discussion.

Comments: Edit warring since October despite multiple warnings and an invitation to discuss rather than revert. Firefangledfeathers 18:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 1 week Partial block on Intelligence quotient EvergreenFir (talk) 18:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

User:74.15.131.143 reported by User:M.Bitton (Result: Blocked)

Page: First Barbary War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

User being reported: 74.15.131.143 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to:

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 00:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC) ""
2. Consecutive edits made from 21:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC) to 21:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
   1. 21:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC) "its not irrelevant , Algerine troops sent 12+ ships to back of Tripoli in the first barbary war which led to the second one"
   2. 21:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC) "Undid revision 1065277348 by M.Bitton (talk)"
3. 18:28, 12 January 2022 (UTC) "the picture is literally american captain paying tributes to the dey of Algiers the picture is preserved in washington during the first barbary war stop with your propaganda even in casualities you can see ALGERIA: NONE meaning we participated"
4. 01:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC) "the picture is about the american captain paying tribute to Algiers after the first barbary war you idiot"

Diffs of edit warring / 3RR warning:

1. 22:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Edit warring on First Barbary War."

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page:

1. 22:24, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Comments:

Apart from their personal attack (see the idiot remark in their edit summary), they are also edit warring on Algiers expedition (1541) (removing sourced content and describing any attempt at restoring it as "vandalism" and "propaganda"). The invitation to join the discussion has been ignored. M.Bitton (talk) 00:34, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

 Note: The addition of factual inaccuracies to other articles continues (left as is until something is done about the IP's behaviour). M.Bitton (talk) 14:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Blocked – 48 hours for edit warring. EdJohnston (talk) 17:55, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

User:68.42.245.120 reported by User:Generalrelative (Result: blocked for three months)

Page: New Century Foundation (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 68.42.245.120 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [20]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [21]
2. [22]
3. [23]
4. [24]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [25]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [26]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [27]

Comments: Similar behavior over the same period at American Renaissance (magazine). See these reverts over the past hour:

Original: [28] Attempt to resolve dispute: [29]

1. [30]
2. [31]
3. [32]
   

Generalrelative (talk) 05:13, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

• Blocked – for a period of 3 months Even ignoring the question of edit-warring, a block is warranted for persistent disruptive editing to try to impose a point of view. The disruptive editing started in November 2021, but has only now started to be done on a large scale.JBW (talk) 10:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

User:David xmz reported by User:LVTW2 (Result: )

Page: List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: David xmz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. 05:02, 13 January 2022 (UTC) Undid revision 1065360442 by LVTW2 (talk)"
2. 04:12, 13 January 2022‎ (UTC) Undid revision 1065204492 by LVTW2 (talk)"
3. 06:26, 12 January 2022 (UTC) Undid revision 1065169600 by EvergreenFir (talk)"
4. 03:48, 12 January 2022 (UTC) Undid revision 1065096450 by LVTW2 (talk)"
5. 10:58, 11 January 2022‎ (UTC) Undid revision 1065204492 by LVTW2 (talk)"

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]

04:47, 13 January 2022 (UTC) "Warning: Three-revert rule on List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita." Warning issued by LVTW2

Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: 11:20, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Comments:

User is currently engaged in an edit war on thr List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita

User:103.5.134.36 reported by User:Anjuvannam (Result: )

Page: St. Mary's Jacobite Soonoro Cathedral, Angamaly (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 103.5.134.36 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [diff preferred, link permitted]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. diff:1065367613
2. diff:1065355594
3. diff:1065207758
4. diff:1065025807

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [link]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [33]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [diff]

Comments: Continuous removal of sourced information and references
12:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

User:178.155.64.69 reported by User:Slatersteven (Result: )

Page: Crimean War (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: 178.155.64.69 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [34]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [35]
2. [36]
3. [37]
4. [38]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [39]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [40]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [41]

Comments:

They have been reverted by two users, asked to make a case and there may be wp:coi issues.Slatersteven (talk) 13:42, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

See Talk:Crimean War#Quotes cleanup regarding the mess this editor (using various IPs) has made of the article by their constant addition of unattributed quotes within the text, something they were told about back in December yet are still doing with their current edits. FDW777 (talk) 13:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Yep huge WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT issues.Slatersteven (talk) 14:16, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Just to add to this discussion to this edit war, as someone uninvolved with WikiProject military history or this article, I previously witnessed this editor making questionable edits to Crimean War. Personally, I found his edits to be POV pushing and his persistency in not attributing quotes problematic already, but it's clear to me now that this editor is simply not here to contribute to the project with respect for the work of others or for our readers. Pilaz (talk) 14:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Part of the problem may be (or it is just a convenient excuse) they are Russian and thus seem to have issues with understanding English. They seem (for example) to not understand what prose means (AGF, which is getting harder). Even with the AGF they are still a time sink.Slatersteven (talk) 14:48, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

I find it difficult to believe an editor who can write a talk page post such as this has any difficulty understanding English. FDW777 (talk) 16:04, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Nunuxxx reported by User:217.149.166.67 (Result: Filer blocked for evasion)

Page: Elisabethpol Governorate (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
User being reported: Nunuxxx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Previous version reverted to: [42]

Diffs of the user's reverts:

1. [43]
2. [44]
3. [45]
4. [46]

Diff of edit warring / 3RR warning: [47]

Diff of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: [48]

Diff of ANEW notice posted to user's talk page: [49]

Comments: User speaks about non existent consensus: regarding azeri name on Russian Empire governorate in modern Armenia and Azerbaijan. reverts without saying why.217.149.166.67 (talk) 14:36, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

4 differences have been cited however, the 2nd of the 4 is not a revert, therefore I have not broken 3RR. It should also be noted the user opened the discussion 6 minutes before the report was posted, and that no revert was done after the opening of the discussion. Nunuxxx (talk) 14:47, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

• Result: The filing IP is blocked two months for evasion. I'm taking their removal of someone else's comment from my talk page that the claim of evasion is likely true. The original IP 217.149.166.11 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) was conducting a lengthy war across different articles within the WP:AA2 topic. The two IPs both come from the range Special:Contributions/217.149.166.0/24. EdJohnston (talk) 18:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)